Approval was originally given for a mine where processing would be undertaken off site and 

where the contents of the on site tailings dam would have been inert. 

This new proposal totally reverses this situation and radically increases the threat to the local and down stream environments. Additionally, my understanding is that the present proposal is for a cyanide processing plant that would be large enough to enable processing of ore from other mines thereby increasing the processing dangers.

Another threat from on site processing comes from lead and small amounts of other heavy metal contaminants that may be found in association with the gold to be mined. Under the currently approved plan they would be taken away with the ore. However if the company’s current proposal is approved these would now remain on site, on a steep slope above the Araluen Valley and Eurobodalla catchments, thus presenting a significant pollution risk in dust, smoke or smelting residue. 

As reported in the media, Unity Mining's managing director Andrew McIlwain makes light of concerns about the use of cyanide at the mine “…as the potentially toxic substance could be used safely if handled correctly.” This cavalier approach comes despite the fact that in the short time in which the mine has been in operation, there have already been at least three episodes where waterways have been polluted.

According to reports, Andrew McIlwain admits the cyanide used in processing is potentially toxic.   Mining history both on the Majors Creek site and across the nation shows that it is totally impossible for anyone to guarantee that it would be “…handled and managed in the right scenario…” and consequently be “very safe.”

Noel Pratt

Kambah ACT